The view here taken of historical events is corroborated by a recent work of considerable merit, entitled "HISTORY OF THE JEWS," in the "Family Library." On that momentous event, the birth of Christ, this work is greatly at variance with the "New Testament." This History represents Archelaus, the son of Herod the Great, as reigning in Judea three years before the birth of Christ, which directly contradicts the relation of Matthew that Herod's massacre was intended to include the infant Christ. Thus the period which has to boast of this memorable event, the "Birth of our Saviour," is involved in apparently inexplicable difficulty, and furnishes an additional proof of the necessity of dividing the labours of the inspired writers into two distinct parts the DOCTRINAL, which commands instant and universal assent; and the HISTORICAL, which will employ the researches of the learned for an indefinite period, without their ever arriving at a conclusion which can be absolutely depended upon. Fortunate, indeed, is it that the "RELIGION OF CHRIST" is not built on such a sandy foundation; but that, on the contrary, the principles of Morality which our Saviour expounds in his teaching need only be understood to sink so deep into the heart

that he who feels their perfect purity and divine origin will suffer martyrdom in support of their truth — a glorious triumph of principle over fact. The excellent work just referred to has the following passage, which still further proves the propriety of the divarication here attempted. "The Bible,' that is, the Old Testament,' is strictly historical, not theological; yet some will not read the most ancient and curious History in the world, because it is in the Bible; others read it in the Bible, with a kind of pious awe, which prevents them from comprehending its real spirit. The latter look on the distinguished characters in the Mosaic annals as a kind of sacred beings scarcely allied to human nature. Writers, unfriendly to revealed religion, starting with the same notion that the Mosaic narrative is uniformly exemplary, not historical, have enlarged, with malicious triumph, on the delinquencies of the patriarchs and their descendants-perplexity and triumph surely equally groundless. The patriarchs and their descendants are the depositories of certain great religious truths, the UNITY, OMNIPOTENCE, and PROVIDENCE OF GOD; not solely for their own use and advantage, but as conservators for the future universal benefit of mankind. Hence human affairs

took their ordinary course; the common passions and motives of mankind were left in undisturbed operation. Higher and purer notions of the Deity, though they tend to promote and improve, by no means necessarily enforce moral perfection; neither does the actual interposition of the Almighty, in favour of an individual, or nation, nor his employment of them as instruments for certain important purposes, stamp the seal of divine approbation on all their actions. Actions are to be judged by their MOTIVES, and not by their undesigned consequences."

Since the "Old Testament" is the repository of these highly important religious truths, the Unity, OMNIPOTENCE, and PROVIDENCE OF GOD, even though intermingled with historical facts, what shall we say of the sacred deposit, handed down to us in the "New Testament," which contains the ark of the new covenant -a perfect code of moral laws with a practical example of the possibility of fulfilling them to the very letter, in the sacred and divine person of their author, who, in propounding the ever-to-be adored doctrine of the HOLY TRINITY, has shone with a light which never man did, and has distinguished himself from every other individual whom the world has beheld since its

T

creation! This only true and genuine notion of the Deity, first promulgated by Christ, partakes of the nature of God himself, and must endure as long as the Divine Essence subsists.

All difficulty, which this only perfectly pure notion of the Godhead may appear to involve, will be instantly dissipated by attention to the following observations. First, it is absolutely impossible for man to think of oneness—it is a complete nonentity, consisting neither of matter, form, nor connexion of these two elements. Hence, when the human mind cogitates, it must think of something. But a thing which is composed neither of matter nor form is positively nothing. Consequently the word thing always implies a compound of three elements in one-a triad of principles, or in fact a TRINITY IN UNITY. Secondly, if we think of a material object, it is quite evident that it must consist of matter, or parts which fill up Space and occupy Time, that is to say, the thing must be an object of experience, and can only be known by its addressing the Senses for instance, a house, a horse, a tree, and so on. The materials of which the thing consists, as the bricks which compose the house, are the matter; the arrangement of these parts of matter constitutes its

shape, as round, square, or oval, and is the form of the house. But this form could not be given to nothing; hence the necessity of the matter; and neither of these can be annulled without totally annihilating the thing, with this inseparable condition that these particular bricks constitute this identical house, with this determinate form. So that these two elements necessarily imply connexion; a third, and the three together, constitute the thing called a house. This reasoning applies to the whole of nature, and quite exhausts the entire mundane system, which is composed of an endless series of triads. Now, as matter is divisible ad infinitum, it must consist of an infinite number of parts; and no one part, strictly speaking, can exist by itself, otherwise the division would not be infinite: the least number of parts that can be connected is two; but, if these two parts were not connected, there would not be a thing. The elements here are two parts, and their union, making three necessary elements, none of which can be annulled. It is quite obvious that every object of nature which fills up time and space conforms to this law of a trinity in unity. Let us carry this parity of reasoning to mental things which exist in time only. Thus, all mathematical figures equally